S26A0349, S26X0350
Ga.Jun 16, 2026Background
- April S. Clark died after surgery and post-operative care by the defendant doctors following a perforated bowel during ovarian-cyst surgery. 1
- The Clarks sued for wrongful death, the estate's pain-and-suffering damages, and medical expenses. 2
- A jury awarded $29.25 million for Clark's full value of life, $2.5 million for pain and suffering, and $1.715 million for medical expenses. 3
- The trial court denied new trial and remitted the wrongful-death award to $350,000 under OCGA § 51-13-1(b). 4
- The Clarks appealed the remittitur, and the doctors cross-appealed on the verdict form, a jury charge, and the denial of new trial. 5
- The Supreme Court reaffirmed Nestlehutt, held the cap could not be applied here, vacated the remittitur, and remanded for the trial court to decide the doctors' excessiveness claim. 6
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the doctors waive the cap by not raising it pretrial? 7 | Clarks: waiver because cap omitted from pretrial order. | Doctors: cap could be raised post-trial. | No waiver; post-trial assertion was allowed. 8 |
| Should Nestlehutt be overruled? 9 | Clarks: Nestlehutt controls the cap issue. | Doctors: Nestlehutt wrongly treats jury trial right as substantive. | No; stare decisis required adhering to Nestlehutt. 10 |
| Can OCGA § 51-13-1(b) be applied to this mixed verdict? 11 | Clarks: plain text and Nestlehutt make the cap inapplicable. | Doctors: cap can still apply to wrongful-death damages alone. | No; the statute cannot be applied without capping protected pain-and-suffering damages. 12 |
| Did the trial court err in the verdict form or aggravation charge? 13 | Clarks defended the verdict form and charge. | Doctors: verdict form missed separate liability/apportionment; aggravation charge was unsupported. | No reversible error on either instructional issue. 14 |
| Did the trial court properly deny new trial on general grounds? 15 | Clarks: the court weighed the evidence correctly. | Doctors: court failed to act as thirteenth juror. | Yes; the court exercised proper thirteenth-juror discretion. 16 |
Key Cases Cited
- Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. Nestlehutt, 286 Ga. 731 (Ga. 2010) (medical-malpractice noneconomic-damages cap violates the jury-trial right as applied to pain and suffering and loss of consortium 17)
- Taylor v. Devereux Foundation, Inc., 316 Ga. 44 (Ga. 2023) (applied Nestlehutt framework and upheld punitive-damages cap where the common-law jury-trial right did not attach 18)
- Medical Center of Central Georgia, Inc. v. Turner, 322 Ga. 129 (Ga. 2025) (reaffirmed Nestlehutt framework and remanded for application to wrongful-death 'full value of life' damages 19)
- G. Dep't of Human Res. v. Phillips, 268 Ga. 316 (Ga. 1997) (pretrial order controls later proceedings unless modified to prevent manifest injustice 20)
- Scott v. Battle, 249 Ga. App. 618 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001) (timely post-judgment challenge can preserve a damages-cap issue 21)
- Union City Bd. of Zoning Appeals v. Justice Outdoor Displays, Inc., 266 Ga. 393 (Ga. 1996) (severability principles address whether an unconstitutional portion of a statute can be severed 22)
- State v. Fielden, 280 Ga. 444 (Ga. 2006) (courts lack authority to rewrite statutes under separation of powers 23)
- White v. State, 293 Ga. 523 (Ga. 2013) (general-grounds motions require the trial court to act as thirteenth juror under the correct standard 24)